fix(pack): import_usage for functions behind member expressions

[fireairforce]

Summary

align turbopack's change: vercel/next.js#93504

fix business runtime error from scope hositing:

Test Plan

add snapshot test case

[gemini-code-assist]

Code Review

This pull request introduces a new snapshot test case to verify how module concatenation handles naming conflicts between exported and local variables. The test includes several input modules with overlapping variable names and asserts the correct renaming in the concatenated output. Additionally, the next.js subproject has been updated. I have no feedback to provide.

[github-actions]

📊 Performance Benchmark Report (with-antd)

Utoopack Performance Report

Report ID: utoopack_performance_report_20260506_094809
Generated: 2026-05-06 09:48:09
Trace File: trace_antd.json (0.5GB, 1.57M spans)
Test Project: examples/with-antd

---

Executive Summary

Metric	Value	Assessment
Total Wall Time	12,613.9 ms	Baseline
Total Thread Work (de-duped)	30,125.1 ms	Non-overlapping busy time
Effective Parallelism	2.4x	thread_work / wall_time
Working Threads	5	Threads with actual spans
Thread Utilization	47.8%	⚠️ Suboptimal
Total Spans	1,567,562	All B/E + X events
Meaningful Spans (>= 10us)	363,839	(23.2% of total)
Tracing Noise (< 10us)	1,203,723	(76.8% of total)

---

Build Phase Timeline

Shows when each build phase is active and how much CPU it consumes.
Self-Time is the time spent exclusively in that phase (excluding children).

Phase	Spans	Inclusive (ms)	Self-Time (ms)	Wall Range (ms)
Resolve	82,147	3,352.5	2,646.4	6,247.1
Parse	10,064	2,427.7	1,997.0	12,489.1
Analyze	218,195	18,465.2	13,289.1	12,097.6
Chunk	17,373	2,983.7	2,782.2	8,885.8
Codegen	29,195	5,316.0	4,012.8	9,004.7
Emit	39	57.4	28.5	9,185.3
Other	6,826	1,554.8	1,296.2	12,613.9

---

Workload Distribution by Diagnostic Tier

Category	Spans	Inclusive (ms)	% Work	Self-Time (ms)	% Self
P0: Scheduling & Resolution	304,713	22,891.4	76.0%	16,768.7	55.7%
P1: I/O & Heavy Tasks	3,074	309.9	1.0%	281.1	0.9%
P2: Architecture (Locks/Memory)	0	0.0	0.0%	0.0	0.0%
P3: Asset Pipeline	55,001	10,569.0	35.1%	8,633.7	28.7%
P4: Bridge/Interop	0	0.0	0.0%	0.0	0.0%
Other	1,051	387.0	1.3%	368.8	1.2%

---

Top 20 Tasks by Self-Time

Self-time is the exclusive duration: time spent in the task itself, not in sub-tasks.
This is the most accurate indicator of where CPU cycles are actually spent.

Self (ms)	Inclusive (ms)	Count	Avg Self (us)	P95 Self (ms)	Max Self (ms)	% Work	Task Name	Top Caller
7,534.0	10,476.7	143,346	52.6	0.1	35.2	25.0%	module	write all entrypoints to disk (1%)
2,726.1	2,753.0	27,719	98.3	0.2	212.2	9.0%	analyze ecmascript module	module (66%)
2,309.0	3,612.2	17,299	133.5	0.4	57.0	7.7%	code generation	chunking (1%)
1,922.1	2,086.8	11,115	172.9	0.4	65.3	6.4%	chunking	write all entrypoints to disk (0%)
1,771.1	3,937.7	40,182	44.1	0.0	20.1	5.9%	process module	module (14%)
1,477.7	1,715.6	7,059	209.3	0.7	36.2	4.9%	parse ecmascript	process module (31%)
1,428.7	1,538.0	45,221	31.6	0.0	20.0	4.7%	internal resolving	resolving (29%)
1,277.4	1,277.4	9,813	130.2	0.4	11.0	4.2%	precompute code generation	code generation (58%)
1,207.0	1,803.8	36,241	33.3	0.0	19.0	4.0%	resolving	module (14%)
1,118.2	1,118.2	5,893	189.7	0.7	103.4	3.7%	compute async module info	chunking (0%)
909.7	1,144.7	5,136	177.1	0.0	167.6	3.0%	write all entrypoints to disk	None (0%)
830.0	830.3	6,162	134.7	0.1	55.0	2.8%	compute async chunks	webpack loader (0%)
426.5	426.5	2,083	204.7	0.5	17.1	1.4%	generate source map	code generation (96%)
320.4	329.6	952	336.6	1.5	15.9	1.1%	webpack loader	parse css (12%)
277.4	470.2	655	423.5	2.2	18.7	0.9%	parse css	module (7%)
241.7	241.7	2,340	103.3	0.2	15.1	0.8%	read file	parse ecmascript (91%)
83.5	83.5	719	116.1	0.0	17.4	0.3%	compute binding usage info	write all entrypoints to disk (0%)
38.0	38.0	316	120.1	0.0	16.9	0.1%	collect mergeable modules	compute merged modules (0%)
30.2	66.5	96	314.1	0.7	17.8	0.1%	make production chunks	chunking (5%)
28.2	28.2	36	782.8	4.3	9.0	0.1%	write file	apply effects (100%)

---

Critical Path Analysis

The longest sequential dependency chains that determine wall-clock time.
Focus on reducing the depth of these chains to improve parallelism.

Rank	Self-Time (ms)	Depth	Path
1	212.3	2	process module → analyze ecmascript module
2	86.3	2	module → analyze ecmascript module
3	74.1	2	code generation → generate source map
4	41.9	2	module → analyze ecmascript module
5	41.8	2	module → analyze ecmascript module

---

Batching Candidates

High-volume tasks dominated by a single parent. If the parent can batch them,
it drastically reduces scheduler overhead.

Task Name	Count	Top Caller (Attribution)	Avg Self	P95 Self	Total Self
No obvious batching candidates found	-	-	-	-	-

---

Duration Distribution

Range	Count	Percentage
<10us	1,203,723	76.8%
10us-100us	339,323	21.6%
100us-1ms	18,836	1.2%
1ms-10ms	5,380	0.3%
10ms-100ms	294	0.0%
>100ms	6	0.0%

---

Action Items

1. [P0] Focus on tasks with the highest Self-Time — these are where CPU cycles are actually spent.
2. [P0] Use Batching Candidates to identify callers that should use try_join or reduce #[turbo_tasks::function] granularity.
3. [P1] Check Build Phase Timeline for phases with disproportionate wall range vs. self-time (= serialization).
4. [P1] Inspect P95 Self (ms) for heavy monolith tasks. Focus on long-tail outliers, not averages.
5. [P1] Review Critical Paths — reducing the longest chain depth directly improves wall-clock time.
6. [P2] If Thread Utilization < 60%, investigate scheduling gaps (lock contention or deep dependency chains).

Report generated by Utoopack Performance Analysis Agent